>>2502664>Many idiots assume that a "planned economy" must mean rule by managers, bureaucrats, or party bosses. But that assumption already shows they're still thinking within the categories of the society they claim to reject.You are totally wrong. Building Communism without proletarian managers, executives, and Party leadership is impossible because the socialist enterprises (including industry, agriculture, communications and transportation, commerce, and all production and circulation departments) are the basic unit of human material production and exchange. Interpersonal relations in production exist in enterprises in large numbers. Interrelations among the laboring people are chiefly of two kinds: The relations between the leadership and the masses and the relations between the management personnel, technicians, and executives (mental laborers) on the one hand and the worker and the peasant (physical laborers) on the other. The correct handling of these two aspects of these relations, that is, to “create a political situation in which there is centralism as well as democracy, discipline as well as freedom, unified determination as well as individual happiness and vitality” (12), is an important issue in consolidating and developing socialist production relations and in improving socialist enterprise management. In enterprises, there are also the relations between the worker-peasant laboring people and the two exploitative classes. These relations have been analyzed above.
The socialist enterprise is an enterprise of the working class and the laboring people. The working class and the laboring people are responsible for leading the enterprise through their representatives. This gives rise to an issue of the relations between the leadership and the masses. Although the leadership personnel and the masses in the enterprise hold different jobs in revolution, they are “comrades-in-arms in the same trench” who share the heavy duty of properly managing the enterprise and who labor for a common revolutionary goal. Workers on the Shanghai wharfs put it nicely, “Though jobs are different in revolution, our thinking must be in unison.” These words pointed out the key to improving the relations between the leadership and the masses in the socialist enterprises.
In enterprises, it is also necessary to have some people in charge of various management and technical jobs. This gives rise to the issue of the relations between the management personnel and technicians and the worker-peasant laboring masses. There are two categories of China’s management personnel and technicians. One consists of management personnel and technicians left over from the old society. With the exception of a few reactionaries who are hostile to socialist society, the great majority of them love their country, love our People’s Republic, and are willing to serve the people and the socialist state. Another category consists of those intellectuals trained by the proletariat through struggle and through the development of socialist revolution and socialist construction. Though some of them may have been poisoned by the revisionist line in education and their world outlook must still be continually transformed, the great majority are willing to integrate with the worker-peasant masses and make contributions to the socialist and communist enterprise. Therefore, in socialist society, the relations between the leadership and the masses, between the management personnel and technicians and the worker-peasant masses are also daily developing relations of being revolutionary comrades and sharing common interests. But contradictions do exist between them; it is not an “undiversified situation.”
The division of labor in socialist enterprises between the leadership and the masses, between the management personnel and technicians and the direct producers still reflects the division of labor of the old society and is a manifestation of the still existing disparity between mental and physical labor. Under these conditions, if the leadership personnel, management personnel, and technicians who are responsible for organizing and guiding production do not regularly participate in collective production labor, they become divorced from the laboring masses and subject to the corrosion of bourgeois thinking and develop contradictions with the laboring masses. These contradictions often reflect to varying degrees the contradictions between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. For example, some leadership cadres, management personnel, and technicians who have been poisoned by such Confucian and Mencian thinking as “those who use their brains rule, those who use their muscles are ruled” do not treat the masses and themselves with the correct attitude. They think that “the leadership is brighter” and do not treat the worker-peasant masses as masters of the enterprise. They resort to restrictive measures and convert the revolutionary comrade relationship into relations of domination and subordination. These are all manifestations of the lingering poison of the revisionist line and reflect to varying degrees the contradictions and struggles between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. At the same time, though there are no basic conflicts of interest among the masses, some people may also not handle interpersonal relations according to socialist principles because of the influence of bourgeois thinking and the relaxation of socialist education by the leadership. These contradictions among the people in the enterprise embody to varying degrees the nature of class contradictions. Although these contradictions exist, from the standpoint of all the interrelations among the people in the enterprise, this interrelation is still socialist in nature as long as the proletariat assumes the leading position. If these contradictions were allowed to develop and the bourgeois versions were allowed to assume the guiding position, then socialist interrelations would degenerate into capitalist interrelations.
The “Anshan Steel Constitution,” personally announced by Chairman Mao, and his series of instructions such as “Management Is Also Socialist Education” (13) constitute the compass for the correct handling of interpersonal relations in socialist enterprises. The basic spirit of the “Anshan Steel Constitution” is to firmly practice putting proletarian politics in command, strengthen Party leadership, launch mass movements in a big way, implement “two participations, one reform, and three combinations” (namely, insist on having cadres participate in labor and masses participate in management, revise irrational regulations and systems, and implement the three combinations among the worker, the cadre, and the technician), and make technical innovations and technical revolution in a big way. Firm adherence to putting proletarian politics in command and stronger Party leadership are basic principles for the correct handling of interrelations. Under the guidance of these principles, the serious and thorough implementation of the “two participations, one reform, and three combinations” will enable the relationship of being revolutionary comrades to develop steadily between the leadership and the masses and between the management personnel and technicians and the worker-peasant laboring masses.
The participation of cadres in production labor is a big event of fundamental importance under the socialist system. It is also an important aspect in properly handling socialist interrelations. Chairman Mao pointed out: “We must insist on the system of cadres participating in collective production labor. The cadres of our Party and our state are ordinary laborers and not masters riding on the shoulders of the people. Through participating in collective production labor, the cadre keeps the broadest, most regular, and closest contact with the laboring people. This is a big event of fundamental importance under the socialist system. It is instrumental in overcoming bureaucratism and preventing revisionism and dogmatism.” (14) This is an infallible truth explained by Chairman Mao after summing up the experience and lessons of the international communist movement. Those cadres who can voluntarily and regularly participate in collective production labor are generally more conscious in their resistance to bourgeois thinking and possess more self-knowledge. They show concern and affection for the masses, humbly listen to the call of the masses, are receptive to criticism and supervision from the masses, and can firmly adhere to the socialist direction of the enterprise. They are more familiar with production conditions and seldom give blind commands. There is one song among women textile workers which describes the transformation of a leadership cadre of a factory after her participation in collective production labor: “In the past, she never visited the workshop; now she comes to the side of the machine to ask for advice. In the past, things were delayed; now they are solved immediately. In the past, only big reports were made; now she says what she thinks in the workshop. In the past, she was called a petty bureaucrat; now she is treated like a sister.” The fact is such leadership personnel, management personnel, and technicians are welcomed by the masses. Even if there are contradictions between them, they can be correctly resolved in good time.
The participation of the masses in management is a requirement of their position as masters in socialist production. Only by insisting on having the masses participate in management can the position of the laboring masses as masters in the enterprises be defended and consolidated. The exploitative class always opposes having the masses participate in management. When the persons in power taking the capitalist road controlled the leadership of the enterprises, they relied on a few bourgeois experts. They resorted to restrictive measures in dealing with the worker-peasant masses. This effectively expropriated the right of the masses to manage the enterprise. Under these conditions, the relations between the capitalist-roaders and the worker-peasant masses was nothing but capitalist domination and subordination in disguise. When people with a firm commitment to bourgeois thinking control the leadership of the enterprises, it is also impossible for the masses really to participate in enterprise management. In effect, it is up to a few cadres to do what they want. Therefore, in these enterprises, the socialist interrelations between the leadership and the masses are not perfect. In the process of China’s socialist revolution and socialist construction, especially in the process of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and the Campaign to Criticize Lin Piao and Rectify the Style of Work, the power stolen by the capitalist-roaders and bad people has been taken back, the bourgeoisie and revisionists have been criticized and repudiated, and the leadership of the enterprises has been gradually and effectively put into the hands of the Marxists and the laboring people. A new situation of having the masses participate in management has subsequently arisen.
Participation of the masses in management primarily refers to the participation of the direct producers, the worker-peasant masses, in management. The masses who participate in enterprise management must not only direct production, technical know-how, and accounting, but more importantly, they have to help and supervise the cadres in thoroughly implementing the Party line and general and specific policies. In the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the representatives of the worker-peasant masses directly participated in the enterprises’ revolutionary committees. They were not divorced from production, but they still performed their supervisory work. This is a new development in the masses’ participation in management. This is extremely important for achieving close relations between the cadres and the masses, promoting firm adherence to the mass line by the enterprise leadership, serving the people, and perfecting and developing socialist interrelations.
The implementation of the “three combinations” of the masses, the cadres, and the technicians in the production struggle and scientific experiments in order to solve major technical problems of production is not only conducive to stimulating technical innovation on a mass basis, but also to accustoming the intellectuals to labor and the worker-peasant masses to systematic knowledge, narrowing the essential distinctions between mental and physical labor, and further perfecting and developing socialist interrelations.
The reform of irrational regulations and systems in enterprise management is another aspect of continually adjusting and transforming socialist interrelations. Any social production requires certain regulations and systems. But the type of regulations and systems instituted is determined by the production relations in society. Lenin sharply pointed this out with respect to enterprise management in capitalist society: “What concerns the capitalist is how to plunder through management and how to manage through plundering.” (15) The regulations and systems of capitalist enterprise aim at one thing only, that is, how to better restrict the freedom of the worker and how to extract more surplus value from the worker. The numerous regulations and endless rules in capitalist enterprise are all designed to defend, and are restricted by, capitalist production relations. Under socialism, “systems have to be favorable to the masses.” (16) This is the most fundamental difference between socialist regulations and systems and capitalist regulations and systems. Systems having to be favorable to the masses means that such systems have to be favorable to the masses’ role as masters, to the improvement and development of interpersonal relations in the enterprise, to the exercise of socialist activism by the masses, and to the development of the Three Revolutionary Movements of class struggle, production struggle, and scientific experiment. Regulations and systems which are favorable to the masses will certainly be favorable to the development of production as they mobilize the activism of the masses. Under the influence of the revisionist line of Liu Shao-ch’i and Lin Piao, the regulations and systems of some enterprises often restricted the masses. The worker’s criticism was that “there are too many systems and regulations and they are created either for the purpose of punishment or coercion.” Under good leadership, the masses should be mobilized to revise, phase by phase, the systems and regulations which are irrational, restrictive, detrimental to production, creating disharmony, and alienating workers. Meanwhile, on the basis of the experience acquired in practice, a new set of healthy and rational systems and regulations which correspond to the need for socialist interrelations and the development of the productive forces should be established.
Major Study References
Chairman Mao, On the Correct Handling of Contradictions among the People.
Chairman Mao, A Talk at the National Propaganda Work Conference of the Chinese Communist Party.
Review Problems
1. How does the system of "two participations, one reform, and three combinations," established by the Anshan Steel Constitution, transform the function of management and bureaucracy into an instrument for mass democracy and the elimination of the essential distinctions between mental and physical labor?
2. Why is the leadership of the Party and the role of proletarian executives and managers essential for creating the correct interpersonal relations in a socialist enterprise and preventing them from degenerating into capitalist relations of domination and subordination?
3. In what ways do the socialist relations between the leadership and the masses, and between management personnel and the direct producers, constitute a revolutionary comrade relationship that fundamentally negates the capitalist category of "rule by bosses" and instead consolidates the position of the laboring masses as the masters of production?